"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." (Psalm 19:1)
https://discussions.godandscience.org/
Legally it's our only choice right now....it's the best theory we've got right now...
you did not answer my question... do not assert. PROVE they are all fake. I want documentation for every fossil. Until you do so your assertions are ridiculous.I firmly stick by what I said. All the skeletons that have been found that suggest a transitional stage between ape and man have been altered in some way. Even Lucys pelvis was found to be sawed/filed to fit together to look somewhat human.
YES IT DOES. Humans walk around on two legs all the time. You do not see any species of monkey/ape walk around all day on 2 legs. You cannot even say there is any monkey/ape that has stood on 2 legs (without support) for an hour! 15 minutes!It doesn't have to walk around upright ALL THE TIME. Since certain species of monkeys (like chimps) and their skeletons reveal a pelvis similar to be able to walk upright (bipedalism) periodically. Such as the Proboscis monkey and the planetdan.
we have transitionals between every group of animals on the planet. What ones do you want me to show you? Or are you going to ASSERT that "that is just a fish with legs" or "that is a dinosaur with feathers". The fact is there will never be enough transitional fossils to satisfy you. Just keep denying it, they won't go away.Sorry there have been no transitional forms found today that can link the developmental stages from one living thing to the next. Just because a creature looks or resembles that of another creature does not mean it is a transitional thing. For something to be transitional we actually need to see the developmental stages such as in a short giraffe neck transitioning into a long neck giraffe. Which to date has not been found, its only in theory.
<sarcasm> yup science is a big conspiracy to lie to the public. They have no desire to help or advance humanity. They just fuddle all the evidence just so to fit perfectly into a little fairy tale called evolution. Some secret arch-villain is funneling them billions to just make stuff up and write books and millions of articles all on something that is fake.Scientists cannot really be relied upon to 'tell the truth - the whole truth and nothing but… if you know what I mean. It is like that experiment (the Miller experiment) where by using special equipment they managed to get a few amino acids to link up in the laboratory, then the media shouts to all of us "Scientists have created LIFE in a test tube!" This was not at all true! What Miller got was a mixture of both left and right amino acids, but in order to create life it has to be all "left" amino acids. What Miller got was actually death not life of any sort. So as we can see it was grossly exaggerated. DNA is a funny thing and as we all learned during the OJ Simpson trial that it gave DNA a whole new twist of contaminants. That's all I can say really!
the size is bigger but the proportions are the same. Giant humans don't resemble cavemen, as in tiny brains and thick brow ridges.I was only using that as an example that human features (such as skull size and shape as well as features) can change and yet still be human - not ape or monkey.
well, wouldn't a flood that layed down thousands of feet of sediment, carved canyons in days, and moved continents have slightly disturbed such monuments? I guess the missing nose would be the least of the Sphinx's problems! The pyramids would have been smoothened and flattened.Yes an antediluvian world existed prior to the flood (such as the biblical patriarch Enoch), and contrary to scientific evidence the Great Pyramid and the sphinx were built BEFORE the flood. There is strong evidence for this at the base of the sphinx but the archeologists refuse to acknowledge it.
I'd love for you to do itAnd again, yes human population and growth are consistent today with 8 people walking off an ark 4,000 years ago. Do you want me to do the math for you
if you cannot defend your assertions, then why attempt to debate on a forum?Love your posts, but you get carried away into too many specifics. I don't deal well with people who tend to rip apart every minute detail and this includes trying to trap or degrade somebody (like me) into a finite cage.
so a scientific explanation based on experimentation and evidence is "just a label"? okay...Technically, every scientific detail/technicality (described in words) is nothing more than “LABELS” (used to describe instances/things). But they still do not describe the “whole truth”.
maybe if you elaborate a little?Whatever you consider yourself, young earth, evolutionist or something in-between, I don't know if you can understand what I am saying here.
you have no grounds to question things you have no advanced education about.... it's like telling someone how to do their job when you had no formal training in that position. It doesn't work. Traps/games are a way for skilled debators to expose the fallacy of the opposition's position. You have fallen into a couple so far.I am not in school or ever tend to be (I am above such things - not in a conceited way) as these little idiosyncrasies and word traps/games totally annoy me. These are in no way a test of intelligence! My mind does not work using these little traps/games.
uh, wow. So Miller succeeded in creating life? Who knew?Ummm, no! If you want to talk technicalities the organic molecules that Miller found were a mixture of both right and left amino acids. This mixture is what we find when a living thing starts decomposing. When something is alive it consists of ALL LEFT amino acids.
I am simply examining your comments.Anita wrote:Zoegirl,
Love your posts, but you get carried away into too many specifics. I don't deal well with people who tend to rip apart every minute detail and this includes trying to trap or degrade somebody (like me) into a finite cage.
Technically, every scientific detail/technicality (described in words) is nothing more than “LABELS” (used to describe instances/things). But they still do not describe the “whole truth”.
I am hearing you say that you seem to want to be able to say anything without criticism or comment. And when somebody calls you out over a problem, you address it and not say you "don't deal well with people who tend to rip apart...." come on, address the argument.anita wrote: Whatever you consider yourself, young earth, evolutionist or something in-between, I don't know if you can understand what I am saying here.
What in the world?!? What word games?!?? You have attacked and labeled every scientist as evil while glossing over the many gross manupulations of data by YEC. I have provided my sources (which you don't seem to address or read). Again, you seem to want to simply assert and then act surprised that somebody calls you to defend your statements.anita wrote: I am not in school or ever tend to be (I am above such things - not in a conceited way) as these little idiosyncrasies and word traps/games totally annoy me. These are in no way a test of intelligence! My mind does not work using these little traps/games.
I am not disagreing with what they found. Miller/Urey found a mixture of right and left handed organic molecules. And while it may seem like quibbling, yes I do object to your characterization of death. There was no life yet, no death.anita wrote:Ummm, no! If you want to talk technicalities the organic molecules that Miller found were a mixture of both right and left amino acids. This mixture is what we find when a living thing starts decomposing. When something is alive it consists of ALL LEFT amino acids.Ummm, let's be specific here. What Miller found were merely organic molecules....not death....not life.
The probosis monkey is not exclusisively bipedal nor does its pelvis reflect this. IT does look more like ours.anita wrote:Ummm, again cringe all you want, the monkeys that I listed above both the Proboscis monkey and the planetdan which are bipedal share similarities with humans in their pelvic bones.Actually, no....Their pelvic bones do not allow them to walk upright. THis is simply a poor argument. I hear this all the time from my students and I cringe when I hear it. Just because chimps and other apes and some monkeys (and even dogs!!) can walk on their hindlegs does not invalidatge the significance of the structure of pelvic bones. Just because we can crawl around on all fours, you would not make the argument that our bones are insignificant in our anatomy. If we see a skeleton of a chimplike animal that has a pelvic bone more like ours, it is an ok conclusion that they walked upright.
I'm not going to do the math for you since I feel at this point that you are just trolling for trouble. I did the research on the hominids for you, the rest you can muster up for yourself with a simple Google search.And again, yes human population and growth are consistent today with 8 people walking off an ark 4,000 years ago. Do you want me to do the math for youI'd love for you to do it
Ok....I am not disagreeing about WHEN THINGS DECOMPOSE....BUT IN ORDER FOR THINGS TO DECOMPOSE YOU NEED TO EB ALIVE FIRST! Words matter. They did not find death. THey did an experiment with a chemical reaction and their products were simply an equal mixture. LOok, I'm not interested in making enemies either. ANd this certainly sounds silly at first. But in a debate, even the littlest innaccuracy can matter.anita wrote:Again, if you are so knowledgeable on amino acids you would know that when living things decompose, decay and die that they are found to consist of a mixture of both right and left amino acids. Therefore, what Miller had discovered was indeed death. If he had discovered “life” there would have been ALL left amino acids. What don't you understand about this?
YOu made a broad sweeping generalization not to mention attack his motives and integrity...I do feel like I have to pry to find out more information and for some reason you resent this. In any debate, you must expect at best requests for clarification and support and at worst attacks. Don't resent or feel like the attack is personal. YOu have made arguments, we are engaging in them. And apart from some frustration and sarcasm we have been quite civil.anita wrote:Himantolophus, I really think this is just a test to try and insult my intelligence. Either that or you are just trying to pry information out of me for your own selfish self. Or maybe, you are just an evil troll.
That's quite an accusation. And its poor argument. You can't back it up. There are hundreds of fossils. I think in the end I am more upset by your arguments than in what you are saying.anita wrote: All the skeletons that have been found that suggest a transitional stage between ape and man have been altered in some way. Even Lucys pelvis was found to be sawed/filed to fit together to look somewhat human.
anita wrote:The history of hominid paleontology is a history of shifting charts, shifting theories, and many uncertainties. Simply put, it doesn't fall neatly together into a nice evolutionary package. Many scientists spend their careers jousting over the proper interpretation of ancient teeth, bone chips and dust. In fact all the hominid bones in all the world wouldn't fill one large coffin
It cannot be a sign of death unless logically there was life before. You want to simply bring this down to semantics and "word play". And we can drop this because we obviously will not agree on this. But words matter, and by saying this is death you are implying that there was something there to have died.anita wrote:
Not to pick at this even more, but everything said lies in a “point of view”. You say things need to be alive first in order to decompose, but what I am literally saying is that all life that is decomposing or has died “shows” a mixture of both right and left amino acids. This in itself is “a sign” of death! When you say words matter, this is why I cited “labels, idiosyncrasies and technicalities“.
Look, if you want to be taken seriously, you watch the language. You are mixing definitions. And that is important in a debate.anita wrote: If I say left your say right and vise versa. These are all word games that only serve to pull apart the true reality of something such as G-d to teensy pieces of irrelevant garbage.
)